Reviews

The latest Mission: Impossible film is a part one of two story but finishes in a satisfying way rather than annoying and you won't feel hard done by.

It's another great big screen action film that we've come to expect. It feels huge the whole time however I must say I while the set pieces were stellar, the hand to hand combat scenes were not great and a big step down from the last film (Fallout).

Thebeginning is slow with a lot of expository being dumped (more than you'd usually see) but once it gets going it is pretty nonstop.

This is a good chapter and Haley Atwell shines but it is nowhere near my favorite of the series.

7/10

Mi rankings

Mi6 Fallout Mi3 Mi4 Ghost Protocol Mission: Impossible Mi4 Rogue Nation Mi7 Dead Reckoning part one.

We are back for the fifth and most likely final Indiana Jones film. I will say off the bat that I do not agree with any of the early negative buzz.

The film starts in the mid 1940s with the de-aged Harrison Ford. This portion of the film was much longer than expected as I expected it to be a minor flashback but it's quite a lengthy entree. The de-aging is good but not as good as the still pictures would have you believe. It suffers with certain movements and in certain lighting. That said, some sections look phenomenal. However it is the current day Harrison Ford voice coming out of the young Indiana Jones face and he walks like an old Harrison from time to time too. However I really enjoyed it and got caught up in it that I think I could easily take a whole film of it.

Then the film shifts to current day Indiana Jones in 1969 and looks gorgeous. Some people were critical of Mangolds direction but I think he did a great job. The acting is great also except the child actor who I thought was subpar.

The third act may be too much for some people but in context of the series it is less over the top than crystal skull and a bit more out there than the original trilogy endings. It was a great rousing adventure and kept the tradition going of the odd numbered Indiana Jones films being the good ones and that the nazi villains being in the good ones also.

We return to Tom Cruise's iconic character, the hot shot pilot Maverick. With the death of the original director Tony Scott this got pushed back a few years but director Joseph Kosinski has tried to make the film feel like the original all the same. The yellow sunset/sunrise tints are there, there locations, the music and some of the classic characters.

However it doesn't quite catch the magic or great character interplay like the first. It does have great aerial scenes especially in the third act. All in all it's an acceptable sequel with good performances from Tom Cruise and Miles Teller but feels a bit hollow and limp when we are not in the sky.

6.5/10.

This new iteration of the Batman mythos starts with a Batman just a couple of years into his reign. The time is similar to that of the Nolan trilogy but darker and perhaps more grounded but what I like most about this iteration is that it's a detective story that doesn't rely on action.

Robert Pattinson is great as Batman/ Bruce Wayne but my favourite performance was Colin Farrell as The Penguin. Most of the rest of the top notch cast were great too with the exception of Andy Serkis as Alfred whose take was all wrong and Paul Dano was very hit and miss as The Riddler (More miss).

Now on to the major issues that stopped this from being my favourite Batman film. Firstly the cinematography is too dark even for Batman films, it's quite eye straining a lot of the time and is nowhere as gorgeous as other dark toned films from the same director. The film is constantly very dark and wet but whereas something like Blade Runner is still crisp with east to see detail, this one just often feels too dark. Secondly the film is way too long for the story they are trying to tell. I like a slow burn detective story as much as the next person but this has a lot of excess baggage and would have been a better film that told the same story with 45 minutes trimmed out.

This four hour version of Justice League might have an hour of footage from the two hour version from 2017 abut even most of that footage is given very different context by the 3 unseen hours. The film looks a lot better and more consistent visually and has a much clearer and often over explained storyline. The first two hours is filled with narration, exposition and montages (often in slow motion). The next two hours is where the team finally forms and are much better paced. The fact that this was released for streaming means Snyder got to show absolutely everything he filmed and it does feel a little long and I think a theatrical cut of Snyder's vision around the three hour mark could be better. That said this is far better than the mashup we got in 2017 that cut the heart out of the film and so much storyline based around Cyborg and the Flash to a lesser degree. 6/10

Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride) is a veteran of several prior Woody Allen films takes the lead role here as a man accompanying his wife (Gina Gershon) on a business trip to a film festival in Italy. I like Shawn in his smaller roles but he doesn't feel the right fit to carry this movie. Despite that there is plenty to enjoy from the dialogue, scenery and dream sequences that reference the classics of yesteryear.

David Fincher finally returns to film with a passion project of his fathers, who write this film. The film follows parts of the life of screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz mostly around the time he was writing Citizen Kane. The film is also shot in the style of how films were made back then and effectively so as it does look like a 1940's film. I was looking forward to this one quite a bit but was pretty disappointed. Firstly the dialogue is mixed too low and without any sonic breadth, rendering maybe 30% or more o f the spoken word inaudible, The film is also constantly under lit, so whilst I was straining my ears to hear, I was also straining my eyes to see. A few tweaks could have fixed these problems but whilst those points were both annoying, it s the script that does not work as a whole. The script has some good parts, particularly in the second half but feels very bits and pieces rather than a fleshed out story. The first half of the film is really quite a trudge and I think the subject matter deserved more. It's not all bad though, the period detail is all as great as expected and the performances are top flight all around. I would not be surprised to see nominations for Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried or Charles Dance. In the end we are left with smart looking (though too dark) film with a script that does not live up to the promise of the material. The second half was much more enjoyable and I would say that all film history lovers should at least check it out for themselves.

4.5/10

Christopher Nolan has gotten a lot of grief for the way he mixes his dialogue into the sound-mix on his last few films not to mention how he has characters speaking distortedly through various masks and mouth coverings. So it seems to me that with Tenet that he is perhaps trolling his critics by making about 70% of the dialogue in Tenet anywhere from hard to hear to straight up incomprehensible. Anyways that aside we have a puzzle box of a movie that is easy to get the basic gist of the story line but the nuances and fuller understanding will probably come from multiple viewings. It is sure to split audiences but I feel somewhere in the middle where I could see the potential in the story and concepts but do not think the story telling is at its fullest entertainment wise. Keeping track of the moving parts is a bit exhausting but can be forgiven for the films positives. The film is stunning looking and feels very large with its practical effects, location shoots and cinematography. The cast are great and well cast, Robert Pattinson's first scene conjures images of Klaus Kinski in Fitzcaraldo. Lastly it seems unlike the muffled dialogue, one of his other criticisms has always been how poorly he shoots combat scenes and other types of fast moving action scenes. This has gotten a lot better in his last few films and in this film he consistently looks to have fixed this and see,s to know where to put the camera for these type of scenes. Al in all its a mixed bag where I admire the visual craft, the bombastic audio over shadows the dialogue and the story telling does not quite work. 6.5/10

I finally saw this film yesterday after much delay. The film was originally shot some years ago and was scheduled for some reshoots to make it scarier as they were hoping for it to be more firmly in the horror genre. The reshoots were delayed due to some scheduling problems with the young actors and then with the acquisition of FOX by Disney all further work was suspended. The reshoots never came to pass and the film was scheduled for release 'as is' which was also pushed back due to the pandemic. Anyways here we are with the final X-Men Universe film made by FOX before Disney reboots the property into the MCU.

The X-Universe is my favourite of all the interconnected super hero movie series by quite a lot despite it not being as careful with continuity between the films. This however is most definitely one of the weaker ones and ts strange production history is surely a factor. That said it is passable entertainment and had some great ideas and concepts going that were not quite presented to their fullest.

This smaller budget film with a small cast focuses on 5 young mutants being kept in a hospital to seemingly help them control their powers. It was written and began filming before Disney was in serious talks to buy FOX so was furthering the set up that they had started in X-Men: Apocalypse of bringing the next big villain from the comic books, Mr. Sinister. There are still traces of that connection and connections to Logan in the film but the post credit stinger with Mr. Sinister was removed as there is no point with the FOX era coming to an end.

The first hour of the film is pretty ponderous and slow going, I would say it even feels padded. Perhaps the reshoots (which are often standard and built into the original budget) would have fixed this a little, The last half hour ramps up a bit and has some cool stuff in it. The cast do an okay enough job too but the film has a feeling of emptiness for the most part. When the final scene comes it feels like The New Mutants are truly set up to make a good sequel but as that is not coming all it says is "that's all folks!"

I thoroughly researched this years ago and came to the obvious conclusion of Woodys innocence and Mia's insanity. This documentary lays it out pretty plain and even had a few nuggets that I did not know.

To discuss this third film in the sequel trilogy one must go back to the last film (The Last Jedi) which was made by someone with disdain for Star Wars and it's fans. He created a 'film' that shat all over the set up of the first part of the trilogy and also did not advance the story or characters with any conceivable direction, essentially killing any momentum and depriving the trilogy of a second act. So JJ Abrams had quite the task to undertake with not only this being the final film in the trilogy but the final film in the 'skywalker saga' and had no second act to build from. Essentially what they have had to do is make two films worth of plot and cram it into one film which makes this an overly fast paced, choppy story that dies not have any quieter moments to balance it out. That said Abrams did what he could and I can happily report that he reversed every decision made in the last Jedi to one extent or another. It is obvious that Abrams hates that film and has gone out of his way to expunge it from having to be viewed at all. Now you can easily skip episode 8 and still get the whole story. Despite it's many problems this film is visually stunning and returns to the characters having charming (although rushed) adventures. Also the one is back to natural junior rather than the bad Saturday Night Live parody type tone the last Jedi took and the film feels like Star Wars again. There was much more Leia than I expected and it was handled very well with Carrie Fishers send off being very respectful. I did not love the ending but none of it was insulting and in the end taken in context of where the franchise had been left this was probably as good as we could hope for and I am somewhat satisfied.

So after the financiers (Amazon) dropped this film from their release schedule (because of the resurfacing of baseless accusations from over 25 years ago) and a legal battle for the distribution rights, the latest Woody Allen film has finally had cinematic releases in most countries around the world outside of North America. After all this I can now report it was worth the wait as this wonderfully light and whimsical film set in New York (obviously) is an absolute delight. The story follows a young couple (Timothy Chalamet, Elle Fanning) who arrive in New York for a weekend where they are met with bad weather and a series of adventures and misadventures. It is a well paced film with a lot of interesting characters along the way. I have seen more visually stunning Allen films but this one does look good and have a few beautifully framed scenes that will stay with me. All the actors bring a lot of charm to this story and I would say this is my favourite Woody Allen film since Blue Jasmine (2013). So in these bleak times if you want something with some light charm to make you feel better while you pass 90 minutes, I recommend this one and at this stage this is in my top five for the year.

After years of a mish-mash of different styled sequels to Jim Cameron's initial two Terminator films, Cameron returns to the franchise as Producer and with a story credit for this entry which ignores all other sequels to become a direct sequel to the first two films. Right off the bat this is the best of the post T2 films but that is damning with faint praise. We basically have a soled enough second tier blockbuster that serves as somewhat of a soft reboot for the series.

The Structure of the story and pacing are on point but not unlike a lot of studio films that are waving their hands furiously to say how diverse they are this one does a bit of hand waving rather than following that naturally diverse suit of the previous Cameron films and just being a good story with strong female leads. It is not as bad many other transparent attempts in films of the last few years but it does have a few cringe moments.

It is also funny that the films action can't look as good as films from 30 years ago. There is too much editing and computer effects in the set pieces, but again.. not as much as many other films of the last few years.

Other than those minor quibbles it is a fun enough film and a distant third in the franchise that has set itself up for more needless sequels.

So I finally completed Ghosts of Mars wgich was the film I had been putting off to complete the John Carpenter filmography, which is now done. What can I say, it was worse than expected and one of the worst films I have ever seen. Set on Mars with the red planet filling in for the old west, we have a group of police going to a small town to pick up a criminal. However when they get there it has become a ghost town... the ghosts of Mars! So yes, it is not a great set up but more could have been done with it than was done here. Sure it has a bad script but the execution of the material by Carpenter is the biggest offender. The direction is very poor, the editing style is bizarre and the story structure of constant flash backs and flashbacks within flashbacks is a disaster. The design of the villains is laughable and the score by John Carpenter and the band Anthrax is the pits. So despite a name director, some good set design for the pretty strong cast to play in, this is a mess and a misfire of epic proportions.

Joker (2019, Todd Phillips)

After the DC comics connected universe films came in under expectations (although still profitable), DC started planning out some stand alone films and Todd Phillips (Old School, The Hangover) approached them about doing a Joker film in a gritty style akin to The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver. With the film requiring a much lower budget than the usual superhero blockbusters it was green-lit.

The talk for the subsequent years of production of it being something we have not seen in the realm of comic book movies before have proved correct, as we have a character study/ drama with this film. In that respect it is a refreshing change. The film is indeed a gritty feeling serious drama with a great central performance from Joaquin Phoenix (Her) that raises the film to another level.

As far as the direction goes, the film looks good but my main issue is just how much it apes the two Scorsese films it is inspired by. Taking that tone is one thing but not only does this have similar story moments (also forgivable) but has shots/ scenes that feel duplicated. It will take film buffs out of the movie as they spot these pretty regularly throughout. So depending on how much the shameless aping of King of Comedy and especially Taxi Driver will bother you may effect your score. It bothered me a fair amount at times but I am sure it will bother others more than me and many less.

That aside it is a good character study with a memorable lead performance and a welcome change to the mainstream box office. As far as the controversy over subject matter, the people who want to be outraged by things will find things in it to be outraged about but in the end it's just a movie and also it doesn't appear to endorse things has just present a fairly believable story.

7.5/10

The Critics would have you believe that the longest running superhero franchise in history has gone out with a whimper rather than a bang. That may be true with the box office but is far from true for the quality of the film which was a wonderful and serious send off with this final core X-Men film from a series that has been a wonderful alternative to the homogenised MCU films that feel very interchangeable and even more disposable as they go. Where as the MCU have pushed the cheap comedy awkwardly against their more serious story lines, the X-Men have always walked the fine line much better with comedy (Deadpool aside, that is a different animal altogether) that does not lessen the impact of the story at hand.

This film however is probably the most sombre of them all and I found it rather refreshing in this market of poorly rendered bubblegum releases. I don't think the blockbuster masses will appreciate this one so much but as a fan of this series I got a lot of enjoyment. This is Fox's second crack at telling the Dark Phoenix saga, with the first attempt (X-Men: The Last Stand) being a rather stale effort from a director who did not have the chops. With the timeline being reset with the events of Days of Future Past, they get another crack at it and while not perfect, it is emotionally resonant and a very good film.

Long time X-Men writer/producer Simon Kinberg makes his directorial debut and does an excellent job with it being the first super hero film in a while where the effects (for the most part) look natural and have some weight to them. Also the performances are a notch above with Sophie Turner (Game of Thrones) anchoring the film with a lead performance better than I thought she was capable of and making this certainly the best female led superhero film we have had to date.

The production had some problems with the realisation that the finale of the film they shot had a similar ending to another superhero film that came out as they finished the shoot. So the third act was retooled in re-shoots, either way I am happy with the result and this is a fitting end to this run of the X-Men, soon to be rebooted by Disney and folded in to the MCU. All we have left is one final spinoff movie (The New Mutants) which has been on the shelf for over a year and will finally have the first of its reshoots soon before a 2020 release date.

Avengers: Endgame (2019, Russo Brothers)

So the culmination of eleven years worth of set up in this Marvel Cinematic Universe that feels like an episodic tv series is about to have its finale and its a big one... over three hours. This film is sure to satisfy those who have been impressed with the last couple of phases of Marvel films, I personally gravitate towards the Phase One films. This direct sequel to last years Infinity War starts off quite slow for the first hour or so and I think this will be the main complaint by most people but I did not mind the low key hangs with these surviving characters. The film does pick up though and has a few laughs along the way, some above average action, fun hijinx but the whole time I am thinking this story is wasted on these terrible visual directors. Marvel films are all pretty bland but the Russos make spectacle so damn ugly. That said most of the conclusions are satisfying from a story point of view bar some small missteps here and there.

Ninteen years ago M. Night Shyamalan made a film called 75 million dollar film Unbreakable when he was hot off the heels of a world wide sensation with The Sixth Sense. The film film did okay money wise (248 million) and with critics but did not generate the excitement of his prior hit but has since garnered a very strong following despite talk of it becoming a trilogy having long gone silent. Fast forward to 2016, Shyamalan after a string of high profile, higher budget flops is now making smaller budget films and gets himself a big hit with the 9 million dollar film Split that goes on to make over 278 million. Not only that, the final post climax scene ties it to the Unbreakable universe, setting up the highly anticipated Glass that will serve to cap the trilogy as a sequel to both Unbreakable and Split.

I am happy to report that despite the massive success of Split that Glass is a low budget film made for just 20 million dollars with a great deal of that presumably going to the larger cast. This film brings together characters from Unbreakable (Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, Spencer Treat Clark and others) and Split (James McAvoy, Anya Taylor-Joy) with a bevy of new characters. The feeling of comic book mythology that was expertly woven into Unbreakable is back here in spades and this definitely feels more the tone of that film. I won't go into specifics but the story elements of the first half hour feels what someone would typically make as the entire third film in this trilogy but Shyamalan wisely goes into some different territory and we get some great scenes with the characters in a slower paced middle section of the film. Unfortunately not every character really gets to shine here as is common with many team up films each person only has a limited time which makes this film unlike both prior entries really only viewing for people who have seen the others, definitely not a stand alone tale.

They make the most of the limited budget and as is often the case with good film makers, it makes them more creative. It is a nice looking film and well made but I think the abundance of POV shots could have been tempered back a a little. The performances from the many characters were all great but as expected James McAvoy steals the show taking on his role from Split again as the man with 23 different personalities (of which he plays 20 here). There were a few things along the way that seemed like lazy or silly scripting that did get a new light once the final twist was revealed. Speaking of twists, there is more than one and he may have overdone it. I imagine the ending will not be for everyone but I enjoyed the film from start to finish, there was a possibility for a while that it would have made the Kill Bill Vol.2 error of promising a big showdown and not delivering but the route they went in the end worked much better. In the end I am happy with this film despite preferring the previous two entries and it has become quite the trilogy.. one that I will revisit.

Halloween (2018)

So it's 2018 and after the first movie has already had two different timeline sequels, a spin off and remakes there isn't really any non-monetarily reason for another Halloween movie to be made but here we are with a third time-line for the series and a film that is a direct sequel to the 1978 original that ignores all the other films and once again stars Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode.

I was worried that the film might be comedic along the lines of H20 and Resurrection seeings this one is the brainchild of David Gordon Green (Your Highness) and Danny McBride (Eastbound and Down) but thankfully it is played very straight and serious. The first act is quite strong with its set up of tone and characters and I like it giving Jamie Lee Curtis her own kind of 'Unforgiven' vibe. This section has a serious cinematic quality rarely scene in any of the films since the original

However the second act kicks off with the inevitable turning loose of Michael Myers and the film goes for a long stretch of being bland and predictable. I found myself pretty bored by this uninspiring stretch and the onscreen violence was pretty lacklustre but even more offensive was the lack of any suspense or much in the way of palpable atmosphere. This is the directors first horror foray and it shows in the second act and is quite disappointing.

The Final act kicks off with a ridiculous twist which they do not pull off and then quickly disregard making it pointless. The very end of the film does improve and it has a fairly robust ending but you get the feeling the film could have been so much better with good moments peppered in with too many bland ones. The film does give a few nods to the now disregarded sequels but they are done tastefully enough and are mostly from the best Halloween films (Halloween 1978 and Halloween 4).

In the end it's a mixed bag of uneven story telling, some great character moments for Curtis but a lot of pointless characters when she is off screen. The tone was good and I think the intentions were good too with this respectable enough effort that is sure to bring another sequel as its box office predictions have it as the highest opening weekend of the franchise and will make its budget back in a single night.

5.5/10

I love the first two predator films and have seen them both many times. The third film 'Predators' had its moments but is not a good film and now we have Shane Black (the Nice Guys, Iron Man 3) trying to rejuvenate the franchise with this fourth entry. Black would seem to many like the man for the job as he was on screen in the original and proved to the numbers guys that he can turn a profit with a tent pole like Iron Man 3. However despite loving his last film "The Nice Guys", I had my doubts that his more comedic sensibilities would jive with a franchise that despite what other faults any of the three previous chapters might have had, has always taken itself seriously. My doubts were realized by the film being a very unserious tonal mess. To be fair at the start I decided to just go along with the ridiculousness of the film and actually had fun watching the first third of the film despite no characters being fleshed out, not being very well made with poor effects. However the terrible choices kept adding up and made the rest of the film a chore. The film has way too many characters and way too much universe building style story elements and absolutely none of them are good. Most of the cast are fine and do well enough with what they have to work with but the leading man is very bland and Olivia Mann is very miscast. The Predator creature through the first half of the film is done practically like he has been in the previous films and looks good but the super-predator who arrives later in the film is done with cgi and looked awful and basically suck really bad. Not only that but they team him up with one of the worst parts of the previous chapter, the predator-dogs, who are terribly rendered and are just a bad idea from the get go. In the end you have a film that was planned to reinvigorate the franchise and tries to set you up for more films but gives you a total mess of bad ideas, bad effects, bad action, some ok gore with a few laughs in a film that looks like a B film from the 90's. Also the post climax tag is embarrassingly awful... I doubt we will see another Predator film anytime soon. 3.5/10

Ant-man and The Wasp (2018, Peyton Reed)

The first Ant-man was a nice, funny smaller film in the MCU film series and this is pretty much the same. I think if you liked the first one you will enjoy this one and is a nice light comedy entry right after the gloomy ending of Avengers: Infinity War.

The narrative is not quite as focused as the first but that is not surprising with this one having a lot more characters including a second main title character (The Wasp). The Wasp kind of steals the show as far as the action scenes and as far as the thrust of the story.

There is a few things that are a bit easy to predict including a certain casting choice combined with the de-aging technology that will give away a plot point pretty early on. Also it is strange to see the Scott Lang/Ant-man character being much more of a bumbler in this one after he proved his metal in his earlier outings.

So in the end it is a fun, 'somewhat' inconsequential film that has some fun action and some good laughs. However this is combined with some plot holes as well as lazy or messy story telling that the films good nature will overcome for most viewers but makes it just not quite as good as the first film.

6.5/10

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018, Ron Howard)

This new Star Wars story is set about ten years before Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) joins the Rebellion in the original Star Wars (1977). The film is a smaller story and essentially a heist film but not a great one. this kind of story could have had so many interesting moments but this doesn't really and merely ends up being a solid enough little adventure with a few laughs and some ok action.

The beginning of the film is pretty rough with some poor alien creature design and a choppy story. The effects are all fine but do not provide the wonderment that a Star Wars film should.. however I will give them a pass on that considering the troubled production that they had. There is also a little too much referencing of previous films but I was expecting that to happen going from what we have seen so far from Disney.

Ehrenreich is actually pretty good as the character made famous by Harrison Ford and eventually you relent to the situation without making comparisons. The real MVP's of the film are Chewbacca and Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover) who are a pleasure to watch throughout. There was only one moment where I got a nice surprise in the film and that unexpected character arrival will no doubt cause much discussion among the fans.

In the end we get an inconsequential little adventure that is a fun enough way to pass a couple of hours but not the visual epic that the Star Wars brand usually provides. I am sure this will sit quite low in peoples Star Wars rankings but it is certainly much better than the insulting and Vulgar Last Jedi that we were served up last year.

Deadpool 2 (2018, David Leitch)

After the success of the first Deadpool after Fox gambled on an R rated super hero film with a lower budget in the X-universe, they have come back with another hard R rated chapter with only a slightly bigger budget. We see some old faces and some new characters with even some surprises.

The film is well made and has amazing action and combat sequences that put the last couple of films in the MCU to shame.. take note Disney/Marvel... this is how you shoot combat. The film is also hilarious, for the most part matching the laugh hit-rate and almost the unexpected heart that the first film had. It is however a bloodier affair and that works well in this setting.

I was worried that the change of director might negatively impact the film but it was a smooth transition to the new blood and this is most certainly the best superhero film of the year thus far and will be hard to beat.

9/10

Avengers: Infinity War (2018, Anthony Russo, Joe Russo)

This is a hard film to judge on its own merits with it being the conclusion of an 18 movie story arc. All the previous films good or bad had a solid story of their own with a traditional story telling format that sprinkled the connectivity and over reaching arc in towards the goal of The Avengers and the Guardians of the Galaxy facing Thanos. So this is the the film that concludes these sprinkles that were set in motion 10 years ago and is 100% not a film that can be watched by someone who has not seen all or at least most of the prior films. The MCU is basically a vert expensive tv show that way and also it mimics large cross over event comics which in my experience, the individual build up issues are better than the grand finale that brings everyone together and leaves little time for characters to shine as they are overstuffed. I think this is that overstuffed 'finale' but that is not to say that there is not plenty of other good and bad factors in this epic.

The Russo brothers started with Captain America: Winter Soldier (2014) which showed their shortcomings in the action sequences (in particular hand to hand combat), from their they moved to Captain America: Civil War (2016) which had a better story with a more emotional finale and better but still imperfect editing and filming of combat sequences but was saved in this vein with a great action set piece in the middle (the airport scene) and a strong final and more personal battle. Two years on they have now brought us this, the third Avengers film which its action/combat scenes are 'mostly' quite bad... I really can't tell what's really happening in a lot of them.

However despite being overstuffed and poorly made in some ways it is well paced with a great tone. It is not overly silly and jokey like some of the more recent Disney tentpoles (Thor: Ragnarok, The Last Jedi), instead it is more appropriately toned for the circumstances the characters find themselves with plenty of more natural humour between the more sombre moments. Another big plus is Josh Brolin as Thanos and the way the character is written. He is the only really fleshed out character in the film and he is a really great three dimensional foil who does not disappoint after such a huge build up. Another positive thing that surprised me was how the film was pretty much half Avengers and half Guardians of the Galaxy.

I think James Gunn would have been a better choice as director for this film but it could have been a lot worse. In the end we have a massive film with almost every character from past films in the series that despite its technical flaws has a great last few minutes that would serve as an even more amazing exclamation mark/ full stop if we all did not realise that due to the way the economics of a successful franchise works that much of it will be undone somehow in the future.